Silverstein's 4.5 Billion

[Mark F]

"Zdanak Bazant" has been debunked, as for "FLT11" and "FLT175"
where is the PROF that either of these flights ever existed at all?

Here we go again with wild, un-supported claims and more goal-post moving. How about we go back to the beginning and have you prove your claim that there is lots of evidence Flight's 11 and 175 never existed. You said there was lots of evidence for this so where is it? Don't even try to shift the burden of proof back on me because its your problem, not mine.

As for Bazant, you are wrong, as usual and again, don't even attempt to support your argument - as usual. Nobody has been able to produce the maths which show his calculations for the inevitable collapse of the towers are wrong. People piss and moan about his use of models but that is because they do not understand models.

 

[Menard_K]

Here we go again with wild, un-supported claims and more goal-post moving. How about we go back to the beginning and have you prove your claim that there is lots of evidence Flight's 11 and 175 never existed. You said there was lots of evidence for this so where is it? Don't even try to shift the burden of proof back on me because its your problem, not mine.

As for Bazant, you are wrong, as usual and again, don't even attempt to support your argument - as usual. Nobody has been able to produce the maths which show his calculations for the inevitable collapse of the towers are wrong. People piss and moan about his use of models but that is because they do not understand models.

Given that the MSM was the first to assert the alleged existence of FLT11, FLT175, FLT77 & FLT93
WHAT prof do they offer up? the phone calls from the planes? Where are the planes?
There is a statement that has been circulated that "95% of FLT93 has been recovered"
however, where is it? all that the proponents of this argument have been able to show
is pix of a dumpster full of rubble, you call that accounting for the aircraft?

& yes, Bazant has been debunked ... period, you can find a plethora of papers on the web
that show beyond any doubt, Bazant is wrong. His paper is a disgrace to the whole peer-review
process, because whoever reviewed his initial paper should have seen the problems with it....
after all, what is peer-review for?

 

[sKiTzo]

..what happened on 9/11 in no way resembled a CD

Insert I Love Lucy laugh track--
Experts from all over the world (and even Dan Rather) disagree with you. Dan Rather said the collapses were "reminiscent of those pictures we've all seen when a building was deliberately destroyed by well-placed dynamite to knock it down"

if it were a CD where is the BOOM BOOM BOOM of explosive detonations which ALWAYS immediately preceeds a CD?

Hundreds of witnesses all say the same thing - that random explosions were occurring throughout. New videos with audible popping sounds of explosions have been released through FOIA that NIST had been suppressing. I've clicked on 2 of them and they've already been removed from youtube but not to worry they will be reposted.

Why were the people below now showered with high-velocity ejecta from those explosions?

How did the explosives get planted without anyone seeing them?

This was made possible by Marv Bush, who was head of the (get this) Israeli company that provided security for the complex. Wtc tenants describe maintenance on the elevators being done by crews from 3 to 5 am in the weeks prior. There were power downs, as well. Could never have happened without Bush's Securicomm Co. having full knowledge of it.

How did they survive the impacts? How did they survive the subsequent fires?

Who?

Why wait nearly an hour or more to set them off?

Because they couldn't just go boom - boom - boom - boom - boom - boom until they collapsed. They waited long enough so that they could say the jet fuel weakened the steel enough to initiate the collapse.

why bring down the buildings at all? What possible purpose does that serve the plot?

They have an agenda that requires us to have no guns or civil rights. Before 911, they determined that if they were going to move forward with their NWO plan, a new "pearl harbor" was needed (false flag) which would enable them to create a phony "terrorist" threat that they could then perpetuate into a never-ending thing that they will continue to use to erode our rights until we have none left. A coup d'etat, if you will

 

[sKiTzo]

You wanted footage that has audio of the boom boom boom....

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

 

[sKiTzo]

Given that the MSM was the first to assert the alleged existence of FLT11, FLT175, FLT77 & FLT93
WHAT prof do they offer up? the phone calls from the planes? Where are the planes?
There is a statement that has been circulated that "95% of FLT93 has been recovered"
however, where is it? all that the proponents of this argument have been able to show
is pix of a dumpster full of rubble, you call that accounting for the aircraft?

& yes, Bazant has been debunked ... period, you can find a plethora of papers on the web
that show beyond any doubt, Bazant is wrong. His paper is a disgrace to the whole peer-review
process, because whoever reviewed his initial paper should have seen the problems with it....
after all, what is peer-review for?

Bazant is hebrew for jackass.

 

[sKiTzo]

Here we go again with wild, un-supported claims

 

[SanderO]

This is BS... the time delay because of the distance from the so called explosions would make it impossible to connect the two. The sounds would have been heard more than a second after he saw what might have caused them.

 

[sKiTzo]

This is BS... the time delay because of the distance from the so called explosions would make it impossible to connect the two. The sounds would have been heard more than a second after he saw what might have caused them.

Your ridiculous notion of what you think it would have sounded like does not even begin to refute the testimony of this eyewitness.

 

[sKiTzo]

I could post hundreds of testimonies like this, but I'd much rather see you post ONE, just one eyewitness saying they didn't hear any bombs . Good luck on that one!

 

[Thoreau72]

I could post hundreds of testimonies like this, but I'd much rather see you post ONE, just one eyewitness saying they didn't hear any bombs . Good luck on that one!

Oh heck, he could cite Dubya. Or maybe Rumsfeld?

 

[SanderO]

I could post hundreds of testimonies like this, but I'd much rather see you post ONE, just one eyewitness saying they didn't hear any bombs . Good luck on that one!

This is among the stupidest comments I have read. You are talking out of your butt... and in way over your head.

 

[sKiTzo]

This is among the stupidest comments I have read. You are talking out of your butt... and in way over your head.

It was a challenge. You can't post one eyewitness that says they didn't hear bombs so your solution is to call it stupid. I understand. It must be frustrating to be on your side of the argument.

 

[Thoreau72]

Frustration that has been going on for years now....:lol:

 

[SanderO]

It was a challenge. You can't post one eyewitness that says they didn't hear bombs so your solution is to call it stupid. I understand. It must be frustrating to be on your side of the argument.

Do you think the media was going around asking people if they did not hear bombs? Or what did they hear?

Hello... I would like to ask you a question... what did you hear? What didn't you hear?

 

[SanderO]

Frustration that has been going on for years now....:lol:

I am not the least bit frustrated. In fact I don't care much about the truth movement. Why must I convince them of anything? I think it is they who need to explain their case. I have yet to see it laid out.

 

[Occam's Razor]

It was a challenge. You can't post one eyewitness that says they didn't hear bombs so your solution is to call it stupid. I understand. It must be frustrating to be on your side of the argument.

Okay, this really is silly. It's enough that there are literally several hundred eyewitnesses reporting secondary explosions, first responder radio traffic, first responder declarations to move back due to bombs on camera, seismic records, explosions directly caught on video soundtracks, etc, etc, etc. Anyone that doesn't have the intellectual curiosity, much less intellectual honesty to look into it further is not worth debating.

 

[Thoreau72]

I am not the least bit frustrated. In fact I don't care much about the truth movement. Why must I convince them of anything? I think it is they who need to explain their case. I have yet to see it laid out.

The case has been made many times Jeffrey, but you deny it. You convince yourself there is no merit.

The case is most simply, as I've stated many times, that the official story cannot be. All the evidence works against it. It is a sham. As Hamilton and Kean said, 'we were set up to fail.'

That you are in denial about the facts is not an argument in support of the OCT, it is just a sign of the cognitive dissonance you experience. Seeing airplanes where there are none is perhaps the most obvious display of such dissonance. Admiring the Emperor's Clothes when he is naked is a good analogy.

 

[SanderO]

The case has been made many times Jeffrey, but you deny it. You convince yourself there is no merit.

The case is most simply, as I've stated many times, that the official story cannot be. All the evidence works against it. It is a sham. As Hamilton and Kean said, 'we were set up to fail.'

That you are in denial about the facts is not an argument in support of the OCT, it is just a sign of the cognitive dissonance you experience. Seeing airplanes where there are none is perhaps the most obvious display of such dissonance. Admiring the Emperor's Clothes when he is naked is a good analogy.

It depends on what you include in the so called official story. I don't accept the NIST explanations... but I don't see the case for CD or the inside job. I believe there were hijackings and more than that I can't say. The commission was not going to reveal everything because there appears to be some CYA going on... it may not be as you want to BELIEVE that it was CD and the inside job... but all sorts of spinning, deception, incompetence, and so forth.

A credible case for CD is not there. PERIOD.

 

[Menard_K]

A credible case for CD is not there. PERIOD.

can anyone PLEASE
enlighten me as to how it is that WTC7 dropped for 2.25 sec at free fall acceleration?
Not to mention keeping its shape while doing so.

 

[SanderO]

can anyone PLEASE
enlighten me as to how it is that WTC7 dropped for 2.25 sec at free fall acceleration?
Not to mention keeping its shape while doing so.

when I have more energy... stand by

 

[sKiTzo]

A credible case for CD is not there. PERIOD.

I'm fascinated that you believe this when, in fact, EVERY element for CD was displayed. It was more than that, even.
A normal CD doesn't have iron and steel boiling for weeks at the bottom. WEEKS! Exotic accelerants.

 

[radioman]

I'm fascinated that you believe this when, in fact, EVERY element for CD was displayed. It was more than that, even.
A normal CD doesn't have iron and steel boiling for weeks at the bottom. WEEKS! Exotic accelerants.

------------------

This is news to me.
Where did you read/hear this?

 

[Thoreau72]

------------------

This is news to me.
Where did you read/hear this?

This is typical of men making passionate arguments for conclusions reached with complete ignorance of the facts.

Molten metal was seen and reported by many, air samples showing molten metal were taken and recorded, yet you claim to be unaware of those facts.

How will you respond? Deny the facts? Time will tell. eace

 

[SanderO]

can anyone PLEASE
enlighten me as to how it is that WTC7 dropped for 2.25 sec at free fall acceleration?
Not to mention keeping its shape while doing so.

First of all... there is clear and undisputed evidence that the building did not come down as a single block... the drop of the east penthouse supports the understanding that at least the east side within the building had been undermined right down to the mech floors on 5,6 & 7 . The west Penhouse then dropped into the roof line and so we can be pretty confident at that point that most of the core region had collapsed. The tower also swayed a bit left and right before the penthouse fell. This would strongly indicate a load redistribution because of failing columns or axial load paths such as the transfer structures.

Although we can't see much of the structure just inside in the facade at the lowest floors...these were wind braces with few columns coupling those above directly to the foundations... very few. Trusses and braced frames are strong.. as they are supposed to be... but when a chord or a member (panel) connection fails it leads to the whole truss collapsing like a house of cards. Yes it does. That's likely what explains the form of the collapse... core drops first, wind braces are pulled in curtain wall and perimeter columns and attached bits drop with nothing to resist them for the 100 foot ht of the wind braces which extended up to floor 8

It appears that the problems began down in the load transfer region because that's what the movement of the building tells us. The problem is we have little information about what was going on down there.. mostly speculation. We do know that something exploded there as witness by Jennings and Hess before 10 am..before the north tower came down. Was this of electrical nature? Was it a diesel day tank exploding? We don't know. But this may have begun some sort of process of slow degradation to the part of the load transfer structure... massive trusses.. all linked together holding up much of the interior of the building spanning over the massive con ed sub station. When release did occur it was 7 hrs after the Jennings Hess explosion and this suggests a continuing process or processes which eroded away the strength over time until the the transfer trusses began to fail.

Now it could be explained by someone setting of devices just before the release... the tower being perfectly stable. But this requires massive devices perhaps and their being precisely placed... and set off in a precise sequence. Or so it seems. There is no evidence of these devices. But this does not mean they were not there. There is evidence that there were fires burning and no means to suppress them. We do know that heat weakens steel.. including bolts which are used to hold the trusses together.

The tower DID distort on the way down.. the north face bowed inward indicating there were no floors behind the bowing to resist it.

Look very carefully and the movements tell the story.

 

[sKiTzo]

------------------

This is news to me.
Where did you read/hear this?

Prof. Cahill